FAA chief says region right to consider bases

By: DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer | Monday, April 24, 2006 10:11 PM PDT

SAN DIEGO ---- The nation's aviation chief said Monday that it was a wise move for San Diego to consider military bases as potential sites for a new airport because the changing nature of national defense may deliver an opportunity to use a military installation for civilian purposes.

"I think it's wise that the airport authority is looking carefully at all the options," said Marion C. Blakey, administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, in a news conference at Lindbergh Field.

At the same time, Blakey said the federal agency would not intervene in a dispute between regional officials and the military should the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, and subsequently county residents, select a local base as the preferred site.

Instead, she said, it would be up to local members of Congress to lobby the military on behalf of the region.

The authority is studying whether to build a new airport or expand Lindbergh Field and expects to name a choice by June. That choice will appear on the November county ballot as an advisory measure.

Blakey was in the area Monday to deliver the keynote address for the 78th annual conference of the American Association of Airport Executives, being held this week at the San Diego Convention Center. She spoke to reporters at the news conference afterward.

Airport authority officials maintain that by 2020, Lindbergh will run out of room to accommodate the region's swelling aviation traffic. Lindbergh is the nation's busiest single-runway airport and 20th busiest overall. It recorded 17.4 million airline passengers in 2005, and is forecast to reach 30 million by 2030. That forecast is disputed by a UC San Diego economist who suggests that Lindbergh can continue serving the area for the foreseeable future.

Blakey, however, said there is plenty of reason to believe San Diego's cramped 661-acre airport cannot handle the area's long-term needs, let alone emerging opportunities to provide a greater share of swelling international service for Southern Californians.

"LAX (Los Angeles International Airport) is and will continue to be a major international hub," Blakey said. "But it is growth-limited and there is not much prospect for that to change."

Prospects are great, however, for demand for travel to destinations in Latin America and Asia to soar because of immigration and because of China's economic expansion, Blakey said. The United States long has been the world's busiest aviation market, but China is growing so fast that it will overtake the U.S. in 20 years, she said.

With Los Angeles approaching a cap on future capacity, and few airports stepping up to the plate to absorb the growth it will have to pass on, she said, San Diego officials have a chance to seize a large chunk of the international market.

"But they're not going to be able to do it with a one-runway airport," Blakey said.

The nation's 15th FAA administrator also said San Diego County leaders should not become discouraged in the face of the difficult choices.

"These are huge decisions, and sometimes they have taken decades for others to make," she said.

The degree of difficulty in choices came into sharp focus Monday, as consultant Robert Hazel of Reston, Va., presented results of a market study to the authority board. The 84-page report revealed that four candidate sites are much farther from downtown San Diego than any airport today is from the city center it serves. The world champ is Narita Airport, 41 miles from downtown Tokyo. That distance is dwarfed by the 69 miles to Campo, 88 miles to March Air Reserve Base, 94 miles to Borrego Springs and 104 miles to Imperial County.

"They're just not going to be successful," Hazel said of the remote sites. "People aren't going to drive that far."

Imperial proponents have stressed that a maglev rail system would slash travel times and make that option viable. But the report stated that, even with an expensive and speedy train, it would take county residents an hour and 22 minutes on average to reach such an airport.

Three of the four remaining sites are on military property. They include Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, Naval Air Station North Island and a Camp Pendleton site 2 miles east of Interstate 5 and 1/2 miles north of Highway 76. Lindbergh is the only close civilian site.

Board member Bill Lynch of Rancho Santa Fe observed: "I've said for a long time that you've got to work something out with the military or you're stuck with Lindbergh."

In other business, the board voted 7-0 to oppose legislation by Assemblyman Jay LaSuer, R-El Cajon, that would expand board membership from nine to 11 members, and require that five be elected from the same districts county supervisors represent. Those five would be paid and serve on the board's executive committee.

Board member Anthony Young of San Diego opposed the legislation on grounds that subjecting five positions to elections would politicize the appointed board.

Contact staff writer Dave Downey at (760) 740-5442 or ddowney@nctimes.com.

Next

Advertisement

Pre-Registration Comments[-]Go to Top

Ex Fly Boy wrote on Apr 24, 2006 11:30 PM:Using a military base for the airport is an idea which must be seriously considered. The study done by the Southern California Association of Governments way back in the 80's recognized the possibility of joint use of airport facilities with the military. You could have a civilian facility and a nearby military facility that could be used to move troops and logistical support and it would make the military quickly available in case of terrorism at the civilian facility.

EscondidoResident wrote on Apr 25, 2006 7:13 AM:Miramar, yes!

Hello wrote on Apr 25, 2006 7:53 AM:If they can do it in Europe, why not in the US?

FrequentFlier wrote on Apr 25, 2006 9:37 AM:Miramar is the obvious choice, whether joint use or exclusive civilian use is the end decision. The needs of nearly 4 million local civilians with no options trumps the military need, which DOES have options.

Sick of It wrote on Apr 25, 2006 10:23 AM:The best answer to me would be to move most of the Miramar flight options to Pendleton airfield, while keeping much of Miramar intact as it is and separating it from a new airport to the south of it.

Elissa wrote on Apr 25, 2006 1:13 PM:Why all the fuss about Miramar? I think Camp Pendelton should be the obvious choice! The so called "elite" in La Jolla, etc. will put the kabosh on Miramar so why bother it's consideration. Our politicians are bought and paid for by the wealthy so Miramar probably won't even make the ballot.

Robert wrote on Apr 25, 2006 3:03 PM:Elissa - Pendleton is the WRONG choice. Flights would go over North County homes and/or over S. Orange County homes in Rancho Santa Margarita. Neither is a good idea. Also, we need Pendleton as a Marine base to keep Orange County and its attitude out of San Diego. Finally - WE DON'T NEED A NEW AIRPORT! Its the businesses downtown and the consultants they fund that are beating this drum and no one else. Besides, if the airport moved to Pendleton, where in the heck are the businesses that are downtown now (by the airport out of need) going to go? Huh? Ever think of that? JUST SAY NO TO BAD AIRPORT PLANNING!

amy wrote on Apr 25, 2006 4:34 PM:Oh my god! FAA has nothing to do with where the airport goes... the nctimes needs to stop supporting the hair-brain idea that Miramar is a good place for an airport... the only place that makes sense is in North County!

Scott wrote on Apr 25, 2006 6:24 PM:Move the Marines to March ARB and have the Air Reserves come down and share Miramar with the civilain airport. A win-win for the region and the military. We just need to get the good people of La Jolla and Del Mar to go along, otherwise we will be stuck with Lindbergh wether we like it or not. Pendleton won't work as long as the Marines are tenants of that piece of taxpayer property. Too many helocopters, too much training activity.

Voice of Reason wrote on May 4, 2006 4:35 AM:Umm... Amy, the FAA standards for airport construction are exactly what is pointing the finger at Miramar. So yes, regardless it's current availability, it is the optimum long term solution and by extension of Standards - and has been known to be for 20 years, the FAA has everything to do with the site. Robert... Seriously. The only airport that compares to San Diego in the world is Gatwick. It has no terrain, no curfew and is 50% international widebody service. It too is looking to expand and it actually has room to do so. You're on Mars if you think San Diego doesn't need a new airport.

Registered Comments[-]Go to Top

Advertisement

Videos